Since January, some CIA operatives involved in the agency’s missions in Libya, have been subjected to frequent, even monthly polygraph examinations, according to a source with deep inside knowledge of the agency’s workings…

It is being described as pure intimidation, with the threat that any unauthorized CIA employee who leaks information could face the end of his or her career…

Another [insider] says, “You have no idea the amount of pressure being brought to bear on anyone with knowledge of this operation.”…

Among the many secrets still yet to be told about the Benghazi mission, is just how many Americans were there the night of the attack.

A source now tells CNN that number was 35, with as many as seven wounded, some seriously.

While it is still not known how many of them were CIA, a source tells CNN that 21 Americans were working in the building known as the annex, believed to be run by the agency.

Thirty-five Americans on the ground, 21 at the CIA annex. Maybe the skeletal security crew at the consulate wasn’t as skeletal as thought. Is that what happened here — not so much a security vacuum as a security presence so secret that it couldn’t be revealed publicly, despite the White House being pounded over its failures for months afterwards? None of which is to say that they shouldn’t have had more security; the consulate and annex were overrun regardless, no matter how many people were there. But maybe that helps explain why the formal security presence wasn’t bigger: There was a lot of CIA in the area and maybe the White House didn’t want to attract attention to what they were doing there by inserting a squad of Marines to patrol the grounds. We already had an inkling of that, in fact, per this interesting but vague WSJ story from last November, which argued that the CIA’s role in the city appeared to be more important than thought. (“The consulate provided diplomatic cover for the classified CIA operations.”) CNN itself followed up in May by reporting that “the larger mission in Benghazi was covert” and alleging that there were more Americans there tied to the CIA — 20 of 30 in all — than to State’s diplomatic presence.

But what were they doing there to justify such agency paranoia now about people blabbing? Former CIA analyst Robert Baer tells CNN that agents are typically polygraphed ever few years, not every month. What could be so tippy top secret that it needs to be kept under wraps even if it means threatening agents’ families to buy their silence? On Twitter, Lachlan Markay points to this Business Insider piece, also from May, speculating that weapons were involved. Which isn’t surprising — everyone knows the feds are trying to round up loose arms from Qaddafi’s stockpiles before jihadis get hold of them. What’s surprising is where the weapons might, might have been headed. To a depot back in the U.S.? Maybe not:

Also in October we reported the connection between Ambassador Christopher Stevens, who died in the attack, and a reported September shipment of SA-7 surface-to-air anti-craft missiles (i.e. MANPADS) and rocket-propelled grenades from Benghazi to Syria through southern Turkey.

That 400-ton shipment — “the largest consignment of weapons” yet for Syrian rebels — was organized by Abdelhakim Belhadj, who was the newly-appointed head of the Tripoli Military Council.

In March 2011 Stevens, the official U.S. liaison to the al-Qaeda-linked Libyan rebels, worked directly with Belhadj while he headed the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group.

Stevens’ last meeting on Sept. 11 was with Turkish Consul General Ali Sait Akin, and a source told Fox News that Stevens was in Benghazi “to negotiate a weapons transfer in an effort to get SA-7 missiles out of the hands of Libya-based extremists.”

Syrian rebels subsequently began shooting down Syrian helicopters and fighter jets with SA-7s akin to those in Qaddafi’s looted stock.

This theory seems sound enough to CNN that they actually mention it in today’s bombshell, albeit as something that’s being kicked around on the Hill. Is that what happened here? The White House decided to secretly start arming the rebels a year ago with the sort of SAMs that everyone fears might eventually be used to shoot down western airliners? Did Congress, or at least the intel committees, know about it? Do note: Even now, after the U.S. announced that it would arm the rebels openly last month, we’re supposedly withholding SAMs from them because they’re too dangerous. If the “secret weapons shipments” theory is true, then in fact we’ve been giving them the dangerous stuff for at least a year. Beyond that, anyone recognize the name Abdelhakim Belhadj? I’ve written about him before. Belhadj is no “moderate” of the sort we’re allegedly working with within the rebel ranks. He’s a hardcore jihadi who fought with Bin Laden in Afghanistan. If he was the point man on helping to transfer dangerous weapons to the Syrian rebels, there’s even less reason to think that they ended up in “moderate” hands rather than in the hands of the mujahedeen.

One other point. As far as I know, it’s a lingering mystery as to how the jihadis who attacked the consulate in Benghazi knew where the CIA annex was. The consulate’s a public presence so it’s a sitting duck. The annex kept a lower profile, even though it was close by, and yet the attackers zeroed in on it later in the evening of 9/11/12. Why? Could be it was as simple as knowing that there was another building in the neighborhood that had lots of Americans working at it and therefore that building was worth hitting too. Or maybe they just noticed suspicious traffic to the annex on the evening of the attack and decided to take a closer look. But if the “secret weapons shipments” theory is true, it could also be that bad actors in the city had actually dealt with the CIA there about getting arms to Syria and therefore knew full well where the annex was and who was inside. If that’s what happened, it’s like Afghanistan in microcosm in terms of jihadis ultimately biting the American hand that fed them.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

What was Obama doing that night? Has anyone in the press asked him? The news media is such a fkng charade. Can’t a congressman get out on the floor and demand to know what happened that night. It’s been almost a year and we don’t know what happened?!? There is no 4th estate. It’s been folded into the executive. Congress is just a lobby$$ convention.

Seriously, she’s rightwhat difference, at this point, does it make? whether it was an arms deal or kidnapping gone bad or just some guys walking around and…whatever it is she said. There is nothing you all can do to them. They’ve got the media.military and all your information so accept your lowly position. Benghazi never happened. Hillary is strong, brilliant and capable. Zimmerman is bad. Palin is dumb. We must stop man made climate change. Moochelle is beautiful.

If they were running guns to the rebels, wouldn’t it help them win the next election, if at the time this became an issue, to soften the blow by having a ready-made “conservative” like John McCain demanding to “help” the rebels too?
Oh, he already has taken that position? Odd….or was it just part of the kiss-up program with the other side?

Long ago, days after the attack, I read somewhere that there was a CIA presence, the purpose of the meeting that drew the ambassador was to discuss the arms movement, that indeed arms were moving from Libya through Turkey to Syria, and that these were the latest arms that Qaddafi had received. I believe it was over on Atlas. This is the first leak is the first independent confirmation of this information that I’ve run across. If this isn’t CNN getting punked this should represent a huge feather in somebody’s (Pamela’s?) hat.

But if the “secret weapons shipments” theory is true, it could also be that bad actors in the city had actually dealt with the CIA there about getting arms to Syria and therefore knew full well where the annex was and who was inside. If that’s what happened, it’s like Afghanistan in microcosm in terms of jihadis ultimately biting the American hand that fed them.
POSTED AT 6:31 PM ON AUGUST 1, 2013 BY ALLAHPUNDIT

Yeah, see this hole scenario is impossible in theory. Think about it, who was in charge of this operation? Hillary Clinton. You think she would allow an operation like this to be compromised? She probably had her top people on it, Like Huma Abedin…
Oh wait… ah what difference does it make. Hillary’s gonna fix it. Now she just has to figure out how to Vince Foster 35 people plus families before 2016. Bet she’s gonna be too busy to be reached for comment in the next few.

I thought that it was open knowledge that the CIA had a much wider presence in Libya than just the Consulate and Embassy members, and was running a place nearby the Consulate along with the Brits, who were the ones on the ground during the overthrow of Qaddafi. I mean the sources were out there for that at the time and the entire plan of destabilization to free up arms and fighters and then destabilize more countries is out of the aQ playbook almost word for word, paragraph by paragraph.

The number of people at the annex, their exact function and names… the all important names… those have been made secret from Congress and the complicit media, with little to no push-back from either. Yet if the numbers reported are accurate, that makes what the dead around Ambassador Stevens’ attack put into the context of trying to hold off something that might just be a much wider-scale event that would also go against the CIA annex: they weren’t just protecting Stevens but buying time for their friends and colleagues to get their act and defenses together.

Yet the job function of the President is to protect his appointed foreign Ambassador and staff, plus anyone else he sends into harms way. That his hand picked, chosen and appointed man in Libya was gunned down by aQ and his response is NOTHING is a tell-tale sign of weakness to the jihadi elements across the globe. Remember, this is Mr. Oh-So-Brave Obama who spent so much time trying to get bin Laden that he had to spend additional time to send a SEAL Team in to get him and then hang them out to dry in subsequent missions. So where was Mr. Oh-So-Brave Obama when his picked man was getting gunned down in the street? He went to bed early.

That does not relieve blame to protect members of the US government overseas when the President can’t be reached for contact or when you, as a military or civilian commander see members hung out to dry for no reason AT ALL. Where were the over-the-horizon assets not just for aerial rescue but off the coast of Libya ready to fire SSMs to support the mission and put down jihadi elements that had ALREADY cased the US facility, Red Cross and UK facilities as well, which gave ample warning of what was going to happen to the US? Not a single missile bearing FF or DD to be found in the USN Sixth Fleet assets in the Med? Really and for true? That isn’t just by accident as that has been SOP for nearly every high-level mission in lawless countries since the US first had ships: something to bombard a coast to keep all combatants putting US citizens and government personnel something to think about and their heads DOWN.

What sort of Charlie-Foxtrot is this?

A HUGE ONE BY ALL PARTS OF THIS GOVERNMENT.

The MFM? Brown-nosing suck-ups, Lefitsts and anti-American to the core for not challenging even the military, not to speak of CIA or the Sec State on this. They are COMPLICIT in the cover-up by their INACTION. Their lack of action speaks louder than all the hyperbole they spew. The MFM are cowards with a very few, very notable exceptions and those few with integrity cannot do all that is necessary to blow this lid off.

Yet the information is out there.

Easy to find if you bother to look.

The MFM isn’t looking.

Does anyone, and I mean anyone, in your house still have any association to the MFM, listen to them, watch them, get magazines and papers from them? Why? They deserve a death by being ignored, not boycotted, just simply going to people willing to do the research, do investigative work, not toe the line for this or any Administration or Party, and to report the facts and then what the reporter has found knowing who that reporter is, what their background and affiliations are so that YOU can know their bias up front.

If that is what you want, find it and support it.

Deprive these oxygen thieves of air.

Force them to get a real job for once in their lives.

And, yeah, that includes most of both Houses of Congress as well, with a very few, very notable exceptions. They want a career out of politics. Yet it is the careerists who are killing this Nation. Turn it back into a job that they will detest and fear their electorate and not want to come back because of the dirt they find.

Because these people are hiding the deaths of our countrymen who died in service to our Nation from us, hiding the dirty deals from us, and by not investigating this their inaction now tells of how they see us and want to treat us. Like the MFM, if they just did their jobs we wouldn’t be where we are now. And they, too, need to be deprived of support and the parties left scrambling as the funds stop rolling in.

And let them know why you are doing it in sweet notes to explain yourself or by phone call to your Representative’s and Senator’s office, wouldya? You want the right outcome? Don’t look to these ‘leaders’ but to YOURSELF and ask why they should do the right thing if you DON’T and WON’T hold them accountable to it. With the MFM you can start immediately, with your Congresscritters you will need determination, willingness to work against their machines, bollix up the works by offering new candidates the parties detest and dismantling the parties at the local, district, county and State level and remaking them if you can even stomach the idea of a political party at this point in time. I would prefer to see them both die off and pure political anarchy fill the void for a few decades… it is what the party system deserves to deliver us to here. That is not the task of a few election cycles, but the rest of your natural life: live free or die.

We gots a bunch of cronies, sycophants, Progressives and outright Marxists in both parties, and their supporters want this system to fall into the hands of the few to control the many. They are living for free and high off the hog from your contributions and support. Time to support something different. And even if you are down to yourself as a political party and entity, at least YOU can figure out what you think is best, explain it to YOURSELF and then bring that to others to work with as a basis for the step sideways to a better path. I’ve been doing that for years, now, and I’ll let you know, right now, it isn’t fun. Necessary, yes, like taking out the trash or changing dirty diapers. You can learn a lot from those experiences, life changing knowledge, that will make you a better person. You won’t like it but you will be better for it. And I suggest you find a stress relieving hobby or avocation. You will need it, as well, so that you can show that you can create something out of such negative energy as you will get. Change bad to good and ye shall be rewarded and feel much, much cleaner than you have in years if not decades.

1. Tis easier gathering top secret information on the feds than obtaining Obama’s college transcripts or his birth certificate.
2. Pelosi actually meant that the taxpaying voters have to be ethical and transparent, not the government.
3. ALL YOUR HARD EARNED MONEY AND YOUR PERSONAL DATA ARE BELONGS TO THE GOVERNMENT (especially if you’re conservative).
4. If you’re a black liberal you can get away with anything.
5. Republicans in the house are eunuchs and ‘traitor mofos’.

Spend your money now before the man comes to take it all. Bottom line is that we’re basically screwed and the whole system will collapse.

Come on… how likely is it that CNN (!) would be the ones to break this story, if it wasn’t a plant by the Jarrett presidency? Tapper? Tapper is just the smiling face of the LSM, but LSM through and through.

And, CNN broke the story? ………………… The new Fox Network? – SC.Charlie on August 2, 2013 at 7:44 AM

Let me make myself clear. I am delighted that CNN broke the story ……………….. now where are the rest of the mainstream media. The mainstream media outlets are utterly worthless when it comes to covering Obama. Fox News is the only credible source of news on TV.

It’s been obvious for some time now to anyone paying attention that the Obama administration is terrified of the truth coming out on Benghazi. This is just yet another piece of evidence in that direction.

I suspected this sort of thing. It sounds to me as if the admin is thinking their bully tactics will keep everyones mouths shut. This is the secret too big to keep. Catherine Herridge of Fox News was on Dennis Millers show yesterday and she said she has been talking with one of those who was injured gravely at Benghazi. He has had 10 surgeries to try and save his leg. Guess he has a “phony” injury eh? With this latest news about the CIA I’m thinking this is the secret too big to keep. Its a matter of time before the truth comes out. The question is will the MSM ignore it again?

They want a career out of politics. Yet it is the careerists who are killing this Nation.

ajacksonian on August 2, 2013 at 7:50 AM

I’ve spent the last seven years looking at politics daily, and this, in a nutshell, is the same conclusion I’ve arrived upon. It’s Political Careerism which is killing our nation. Returning public service to a temporary job is the key to stopping bad policy, deterring cronyism and corruption, and putting the “representation” back in government.

We need to boot these people out and elect people who are willing to amend the Constitution to include term limits. Our government is no longer representative of the people… it’s a huge marketing conglomerate whereby they use all their power and resources in order to keep us all fooled so they can stay in office. This is illustrated clearly by so-called “Immigration Reform”, which has nothing of merit to offer to the general welfare of the United States and is nothing more than in-your-face political pandering.

Let’s assume that it was a gun running operation and that the CIA was running guns to/from rebels in Libya and also running guns to rebels in Syria. Now, why would AQ attack the embassy? Didn’t AQ benefit from the gun running (as recipients of the guns?). Or was the CIA taking guns back?

Yeah but Hillary promised to make sure that amateur film maker be brought to justice. A promise she made to the families of the dead as she shook their hands and used the coffins of their loved ones as a back drop for her publicity photo. I think she only shook their hands in an effort to wipe the blood off of hers.

They want a career out of politics. Yet it is the careerists who are killing this Nation.

ajacksonian on August 2, 2013 at 7:50 AM

.
I’ve spent the last seven years looking at politics daily, and this, in a nutshell, is the same conclusion I’ve arrived upon. It’s Political Careerism which is killing our nation. Returning public service to a temporary job is the key to stopping bad policy, deterring cronyism and corruption, and putting the “representation” back in government.

We need to boot these people out and elect people who are willing to amend the Constitution to include term limits. Our government is no longer representative of the people… it’s a huge marketing conglomerate whereby they use all their power and resources in order to keep us all fooled so they can stay in office. This is illustrated clearly by so-called “Immigration Reform”, which has nothing of merit to offer to the general welfare of the United States and is nothing more than in-your-face political pandering.

It needs to stop. All of it. And the key is to end incumbency.

Murf76 on August 2, 2013 at 11:04 AM

.
I totally agree, but getting all of the American citizenry to agree to “vote ‘em all out” is not tenable.

Late to the discussion. I recall a comment printed about Petreaus being cool with the idea of arming Syrian rebels through Hillary’s state dept. going back to last summer. Has this been covered in the thread?

This has been my theory for a long time. No other way to explain the responses given so far. We were doing something “bad” at the Annex, and wanted the story to go away.

I almost can bring myself to support the intent – to protect us from a very negative international response and a weakened position. But at the bottom of it, truth is more important. Lies lead to more lies – wicked webs which very often make the situation much worse.

Sometimes lies work in the short run. And really, that’s all politicians care about – the short run.

I totally agree, but getting all of the American citizenry to agree to “vote ‘em all out” is not tenable.

If anyone can prove me wrong, PLEASE, DO IT !

listens2glenn on August 2, 2013 at 11:41 AM

No saying it’s easy. But really, how many people have you met lately who are just utterly fed up with both parties? If I spend ten minutes talking to nearly anyone about politics, I note that same disillusionment almost universally. To be honest, I don’t think it would take more than a bumper sticker campaign to get the ball rolling. The support is there. We just need candidates that will harness it.

Stevens’ last meeting on Sept. 11 was with Turkish Consul General Ali Sait Akin, and a source told Fox News that Stevens was in Benghazi “to negotiate a weapons transfer in an effort to get SA-7 missiles out of the hands of Libya-based extremists.”

This is Fast and Furious – Benghazi… The sequel!

Our government is so corrupt, GOP, Dems, it really doesn’t matter anymore.

After listening to a replay of HRC testimony on Benghazi on Rush this morning, I think I heard a faint “It depends on what your meaning of the word is, is” moment, in regard to shipping arms out of Libya.

Stevens’ last meeting on Sept. 11 was with Turkish Consul General Ali Sait Akin, and a source told Fox News that Stevens was in Benghazi “to negotiate a weapons transfer in an effort to get SA-7 missiles out of the hands of Libya-based extremists.”

This is Fast and Furious – Benghazi… The sequel!

Our government is so corrupt, GOP, Dems, it really doesn’t matter anymore.

SayNo2-O on August 2, 2013 at 12:17 PM

Agree on corruption but if the report you mentioned is true…why would we NOT have personnel trying to get SA-7 out of circulation? You know those are old Russian SAMs right? Finding and taking down SA-7 would be a normal mission for some Embassy personnel.

Probably why this is being leaked out…”we” should have been trying to get those SAMs. Ambassador shouldn’t have been at the tip of the spear on it….but it’s legit that some “spooks” would be involved. Guess it depends on what we were swapping for them…and if they were “operational” SAMs not just rusty junk.

I don’t see what the problem is in putting two and two together. The CIA was obviously delivering surface-to-air missiles to Al Queda — the sort of missiles that can shoot down passenger jets. The CIA was aiding and abetting the enemies of the United States. The question of why they are threatening the lives of the witnesses’ families is obvious from the Constitution:

“Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

That’s why they have to ruthlessly suppress the witnesses. All the pieces are there. There is no puzzle. What happens going forward is purely political. Can it all be proven, can witnesses be brought forward, is the political will there to force the issue, and what would happen if the issue were brought forward and forced.

And the real bombshell is some other news outlet other than Fox reported the news. All be it old news for some of us.

DDay on August 2, 2013 at 1:41 PM

That’s what is funny about this. This is not a scoop. Reuters and the British press have been reporting on this since the very early days after Sept. 11, 2012. The world has known about this. Americans were just busy watching Honey Boo Boo and juiced-up baseball.

Perhaps. Of course, a simpler explanation is that Libyans aren’t all blind and saw a bunch of Americans sticking out like a sore thumb who obviously weren’t Peace Corp volunteers working out of the annex.

I thought the original rightwing meme was that there wasn’t enough security in Benghazi…now we know there were a lot more CIA operatives than previously thought. What does this actually mean for this “scandal.” What was the wrongdoing? What did that wrongdoing lead to?

libfreeordie on August 1, 2013 at 6:53 PM

Let’s go in order, shall we?

Pretending to call it a rightwing meme is disingenuous, when the Administration’s own description of why they couldn’t protect American citizens is that the security forces available was so very skeletal.

That there were 30+ CIA operatives in the locality is not the same as saying that there was adequate security. The description of the working objectives of those operatives would need to be known to say one way or the other, and that is precisely the sort of information being withheld. An office full of Agency analysts does not a security force make. Nor does a warehouse full of logistics operatives responsible for transfer of materiel.

Your closing questions are actually relevant, though you intend the usual obfuscation, misdirection, and projection. The question which must precede those is why, if there were so many Agency personnel nearby, wasn’t more done to protect them or the diplomatic mission. One easy assumption to make is that the previously undisclosed CIA contingent had the means to take care of themselves, and it was the fact of those means, or the reason for the necessity of those means, that required them to remain undisclosed.

Just in case you aren’t following, they were transferring arms, and in a pinch could defend themselves with said material, but the transfer activity itself would indeed be a larger scandal than the “embarrassing” inability to protect the Ambassador and others. Accept the small blame to evade the larger, it’s a way of life for your kind of people.

Let’s put it this way. Both the Black Community in the case of Saint Trayvon, and your 1/4 Black President, found it convenient to try to kill or to turn the back on a gay killing to cover up for their own bigotry and stupidity. In the Case of Obama and Hillary, they succeeded in suckering the gay man into taking the fall.

There. Get it now? Does that communicate directly to your perpetual victim-hood?

I’d advise you not to go to work for the State Dept. or for Jesse Jackson, as you’ll end up cleaning up his sex bed after every one of his escapades. That is what Gays are good for in the Jesse Jackson organization.